|
Re: New bureacracy/coherence: msg#00003science.mathematics.frogs
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Richard McKinley wrote: Hi all, Hi Richard, you are quite right. From the viewpoint of coherence one might want to have an equality between the two. And in fact, the two are the same in our proof net categories (see [1] and [2]), and also in the category mentioned at the end of my paper [3] that you are citing above. However, what are the right axioms? This should be a simple and beautiful set of equations, and not something ugly as we have here. Since we were not able to produce such a set, we came up with the sledge-hammer axiom of "graphicality" in [2] and relegated medial to a footnote. Right now we are working on the categorical treatment of medial. But the only useful thing that I can at the moment say about your example is that it seems not to follow from the equations that I have right now (which is probably not very useful...) --- maybe Francois can say more. Regards, Lutz [1] F.Lamarche & L.Strassburger: "Naming Proofs in Classical Propositional Logic", TLCA'05 [2] F.Lamarche & L.Strassburger: "Constructing free Boolean Categories", LICS'05 [3] L.Strassburger: "From Deep Inference to Proof Nets", SD'05 (all available from my webpage) |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | New bureacracy/coherence: 00003, Richard McKinley |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re:New bureacracy/coherence: 00003, Alessio Guglielmi |
| Previous by Thread: | New bureacracy/coherencei: 00003, Richard McKinley |
| Next by Thread: | Re:New bureacracy/coherence: 00003, Alessio Guglielmi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |